DEPARTMENT OF THE NAVY
BOARD FOR CORRECTION OF NAVAL RECORDS
2 NAVY ANNEX
WASHINGTON DC 2O37O~51OO

			JRE
										Docket No. 05807-05
										6 October 2006

This is in reference to your application for correction of your naval record pursuant to the provisions of title 10 of the United States Code, section 1552.

A three-member panel of the Board f or Correction of Naval Records, sitting in executive session, considered your application on 28 September 2006. Your allegations of error and injustice were reviewed in accordance with administrative regulations and procedures applicable to the proceedings of this Board. Documentary material considered by the Board consisted of your application, together with all material submitted in support thereof, your naval record and applicable statutes, regulations and policies.

After careful and conscientious consideration of the entire record, the Board found that the evidence submitted was insufficient to establish the existence of probable material error or injustice.

The Board found that you enlisted in the Navy on 28 June 1998. You received nonjudicial punishment (NJP) on 4 August 1998 and 1 October 1999, for multiple offenses, to include unauthorized absences, missing the movement of your unit or vessel, and disobedience of orders or regulations. You underwent a pre-separation physical examination on 19 October 1999, and were found physically qualified for separation. You were discharged by reason of misconduct on 12 November 1999, with a general discharge. Effective 13 November 1999, the Department of Veterans Affairs (VA) awarded you a 10% disability rating for a knee condition, and 0% ratings for several other conditions.

The Board was not persuaded that you were unfit for duty by reason of physical disability at the time of your discharge. Although you received treatment for numerous conditions during your enlistment, all were relatively minor in nature, as reflected in the minimal disability ratings you received from the VA effective the day following your discharge. The Board noted that even if you had been considered unfit for duty, you would not have been entitled to disability separation or retirement, because processing with a view toward separation by reason of misconduct would have taken precedence over and precluded disability processing. The Board could not find any basis for granting your request for “upgrade from El to E4”, or for changing the characterization of your service from under honorable conditions to fully honorable. Accordingly, your application has been denied. The names and votes of the members of the panel will be furnished upon request.

The Board did no consider your request for amendment of your DD 214 to show all “citations & ribbons awarded”, as that is an administrative matter under the purview of the Commander, Navy Personnel Command.

It is regretted that the circumstances of your case are such that favorable action cannot be taken. You are entitled to have the Board reconsider its decision upon submission of new and material evidence or other matter not previously considered by the Board. In this regard, it is important to keep in mind that a presumption of regularity attaches to all official records. Consequently, when applying for a correction of an official naval record, the burden is on the applicant to demonstrate the existence of probable material error or injustice.

Sincerely,

	W. DEAN PFEIFFER
							    Executive Director